By Mary Hladky
The proposed Midtown project is beset by complications as city staff and a city board are at odds about what rules the developer will have to follow.
The intracity disagreements surfaced at a Dec. 11 Boca Raton City Council workshop when city staff presented its analysis of conditions the Planning and Zoning Board recommended the City Council adopt before giving the developer the go-ahead to build.
The debate will continue during two public hearings on Midtown expected Jan. 8 and 23.
As it stands, city staff and developer Crocker Partners disagree on key parts of proposed ordinances that set the framework for how Midtown can be built, and city staff has rejected some of the planning board’s recommendations.
“We have a difficult road ahead,” council member Scott Singer said near the end of the meeting. “I am at a loss as to how we are going to harmonize” the positions of staff, Crocker Partners and other property owners in the 300-acre Midtown site.
Although Crocker Partners managing partner Angelo Bianco considers some conditions proposed by the city to be unconstitutional, he still hopes they can reach an agreement.
“I am very hopeful we will reach an acceptable solution,” he said after the meeting. Midtown “will be a real bonus for our city.”
Midtown, located between Interstate 95 and the Town Center at Boca Raton, is envisioned as a “live, work, play” transit-oriented development where people will live and walk or take shuttles to their jobs in the area, shopping and restaurants.
As many as 2,500 rental units would be built where no residential now exists. The South Florida Regional Transportation Authority is considering building a Tri-Rail station that would bring people to and from the area at one of two possible locations near Northwest 19th Street along the CSX railroad tracks.
Among the areas of disagreement:
• Crocker Partners and other landowners want to build 2,500 units. City staff wants no units built until the Tri-Rail station is working, saying Midtown can’t be a transit-oriented development if there is no transit.
The planning board recommends that 600 units can be built before the station is running.
Crocker Partners supports a Tri-Rail station, but says it is not necessary to the success of its project and that mandating a station before construction can begin is unconstitutional. The developer contends the restriction creates a building moratorium until 2022 when Tri-Rail officials have said the station, if approved, would be built.
• Crocker Partners wanted to build some units as small as 500 square feet for young people likely to use mass transit.
The planning board recommended the smallest units be 700 square feet. City staff agreed to revise the proposed ordinance to make that change.
• The planning board recommended a shuttle system controlled by the city be in place before any residential units are approved.
Staff agreed to add that provision, saying shuttles would support both the transit-oriented development and the Tri-Rail station. But they don’t agree that the city must operate the shuttles.
Crocker Partners has said it wants and will support a shuttle system.
• The planning board recommended that no residential development be approved until all street infrastructure is constructed to new standards in the proposed ordinances, all power lines are buried, bike pathways and sidewalks are built, and landscaping completed.
City staff suggested a middle ground: Once infrastructure improvements are completed in one area, development can proceed.
Crocker Partners says completing all infrastructure improvements prior to construction is not feasible and the requirement is unconstitutional because it would create a development moratorium. The developer also says it would leave the city on the hook for paying for all of the very costly improvements, rather than sharing the costs with the county and other government entities.
• City staff wants building height in the area limited to seven stories, or 105 feet.
Crocker Partners contends the 105-foot limit is arbitrary and wants a maximum height of 145 feet.
The planning board recommended 145 feet, but city staff does not want to make this change.
Comments